On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 08:42:50AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:16:42PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Since the blocks reserved by the per-AG reservation mechanism are never > > available to userspace, there's no point in reporting them via statfs. > > Reduce the number of blocks reported by statfs so our space accounting > > works the way it did in the old days -- f_blocks is the theoretical > > upper bound on the amount of space that user programs could allocate, > > and f_blocks is the current maximum. > > > > This eliminates the regression where you format a 100T XFS and df > > reports 2T are already "used". Now it reports that you have a 98T > > filesystem. > > > > (Dave's thinp rfc might very well fix this whole problem; this is > > purely a bandaid to shut down the complaints.) > > Yes, it does. These two patches from the series can stand alone, > though I've renamed the variables I used as a result of discussion > with Brian and Amir. If you want to take these instead, I'll post my > updated patches for you: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg12211.html > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg12215.html Sure, please send along whatever the latest version looks like. m_LBA_size -> m_total_size -> m_fs_addr_space etc. :) FWIW I already took the patch that converts the remaining hasFOO helper functions. --D > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
